When to Replace a Refrigerator?
flac...@my-deja.com
should a refrigerator be replaced?
I need a $50 gasket in my 20-year old GE side-by-side ... the almond
color isn't terribly current, but I'd rather have a life-cycle or
efficiency justification for the changeout rather than "well, I guess
it's time to replace it."
--
Mark Hankins
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
George Estep
If it's 20 years old, you may be able to pay for it fairly quickly by
buying a new, more efficient one. Here are some numbers:
My new 26 cubic foot Whirlpool conquest uses about 680 kWh/year of
electricity for a total cost of about $47.60 per year at 7 cents per kWh.
Based on survey information I have seen, your 20 year old probably uses over
2000 kWh/year for a total electricity cost of about $150 per year. With a
broken seal, it may even be worse than that.
At my electricity rate, it may not make sense to replace it. You should
plug in your rate and see.
Regards,
George Estep
<flac...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:93ciqt$ih4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
db...@sprynet.com
going. changed out the evap. fan, the cond. fan, gasket on door,
various plastic parts that broke(cracked inside the frig.) I have bought
the repair books for all my appliances and think that we will have it
hopefully another 28 years, just wish I could take care of myself as
good as the appliances, just cant find any replacement parts for
myself.. Oh, I would suggest that you get a hair dryer and keep it
handy to warm up any part of th frig. that is made of plastic that you
intend to remove, loosen,or bend, I found out the hard way when doing
some interior work on the frig, the plastic is cold and brittle.......
flac...@my-deja.com
"George Estep" <gke...@shentel.net> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> If it's 20 years old, you may be able to pay for it fairly
> quickly by buying a new, more efficient one. Here are some
> numbers:
Thanks. Mine's 19.8 cu/ft, and I still have the sticker from the door
jamb, but it has no information about electricity usage (pre-energy
sticker regs, evidently) ... how can I measure or estimate usage,
especially given a questionable gasket (and the problem *would* have to
be at the bottom where the coldest air can leak out, wouldn't it)?
I really wish there was a small digital usage meter that could be
plugged between an appliance and the wall, but useful stuff like this
seems too much to hope for from the industry.
Since I'm probably selling in a couple of years, and I understand
kitchen project dollars come out of a sale at almost a 1/1 ratio (if
not a little better), it probably makes good sense to do the
replacement regardless (simply assuming without further evidence that
this old one is an inefficient dog).
Tom Ruta
...
>> If it's 20 years old, you may be able to pay for it fairly
>> quickly by buying a new, more efficient one. Here are some
>> numbers:
>
>Thanks. Mine's 19.8 cu/ft, and I still have the sticker from the door
>jamb, but it has no information about electricity usage (pre-energy
>sticker regs, evidently) ... how can I measure or estimate usage,
>especially given a questionable gasket (and the problem *would* have to
>be at the bottom where the coldest air can leak out, wouldn't it)?
>
>I really wish there was a small digital usage meter that could be
>plugged between an appliance and the wall, but useful stuff like this
>seems too much to hope for from the industry.
>
Try http://www.pge.com/003_save_energy/003b_bus/003b1d2a_cal/
Also, anecdotally, we replaced the fridge at the cottage two years ago
and the bill went down by half!
Tom
==============================================================
Need info on COTTAGES and CABINS?
http://www.cottageliving.com
==============================================================
flac...@my-deja.com
"db...@sprynet.com" <db...@sprynet.com> wrote:
> flac...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness,
> > when should a refrigerator be replaced?
> >
> > changeout rather than "well, I guess it's time to replace it."
> >
But if (owing to technological efficiency improvements) you spend the
cost of a new one every few years in unnecessary utility charges, why
not have that spanking new one? Then you don't have to look at the old
one's aging (including cracked and broken pieces), or keep it
maintained with a vanishingly small pool of replacement parts, or worry
whether it's going to quit and cause you to scramble for a replacement.
Meanwhile, when the payback period ends, your additional savings are
gravy for you and your family. Have you done the numbers with respect
to whether you should keep that venerable relic?
Red Edison
flac...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> I really wish there was a small digital usage meter that could be
> plugged between an appliance and the wall, but useful stuff like this
> seems too much to hope for from the industry.
Y'know, I was thinking the exact same thing and did a little bit of
searching around the internet. I found a couple, but they don't seem to
be targeted at consumers, and I couldn't get any prices. (I think they
expect the customer's purchasing dept. to call their sales dept. to work
out the details.) It seems this is the kind of thing they should be able
to sell at Radio Shack for less than $20. I suppose we could blame the
lack of such a device on a conspiracy by the electrical appliance
industry, much like the proposal I have bandied about to have a
dollarometer on car dashboards that factors in mileage, gasoline,
insurance, depreciation, etc. and shows you, mile by mile, much it's
actually costing you to drive your car. The response I always get is
that the auto and oil industries would never let such a device get to
market.
funky_t...@my-deja.com
> > If it's 20 years old, you may be able to pay for it fairly
> > quickly by buying a new, more efficient one. Here are some
> > numbers:
>
> Thanks. Mine's 19.8 cu/ft, and I still have the sticker from the door
> jamb, but it has no information about electricity usage (pre-energy
> sticker regs, evidently) ... how can I measure or estimate usage,
> especially given a questionable gasket (and the problem *would* have
to
> be at the bottom where the coldest air can leak out, wouldn't it)?
>
> I really wish there was a small digital usage meter that could be
> plugged between an appliance and the wall, but useful stuff like this
> seems too much to hope for from the industry.
I was researching this, in anticipation of converting to solar
power some day. The two consumer-level products that I know of are
the Brand Electronics power meters
(http://www.brandelectronics.com/powermeter.htm) and the Watts Up meter
(can be seen at http://www.doubleed.com).
Last time I checked, both were in the $150 range.
Maybe not worth it to test a single appliance (the old fridge), but
if you're wanting to do a whole-house load analysis, these might be
helpful.
-- Trilobyte
ObFrugal: Ditching store-bought bread and grinding our own flower.
I haven't done the numbers, but at $10.50 per 50-lb bag, whole wheat
is *tons* cheaper than the $1/loaf I was getting elsewhere.
Dan Hicks
>
> Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness, when
> should a refrigerator be replaced?
>
> I need a $50 gasket in my 20-year old GE side-by-side ... the almond
> color isn't terribly current, but I'd rather have a life-cycle or
> efficiency justification for the changeout rather than "well, I guess
> it's time to replace it."
Check with an independent appliance repair place -- you may be able to
buy a generic gasket kit for less than half the cost of the GE part.
Otherwise it depends a lot on whether it's a frost-free unit or not. If
not then there won't be much improvement in efficiency in the new unit
(and it will probably be worse, since it's hard to buy a non-frost-free
unit anymore).
Dan Hicks
> I really wish there was a small digital usage meter that could be
> plugged between an appliance and the wall, but useful stuff like this
> seems too much to hope for from the industry.
Check with your utility company. Many have such units that they will
lend out.
Dan Hicks
> We have a Whirlpool refrig. bought in 1972, wow 28 year old and still
> going. changed out the evap. fan, the cond. fan, gasket on door,
> various plastic parts that broke(cracked inside the frig.) I have bought
> the repair books for all my appliances and think that we will have it
> hopefully another 28 years, just wish I could take care of myself as
> good as the appliances, just cant find any replacement parts for
> myself.. Oh, I would suggest that you get a hair dryer and keep it
> handy to warm up any part of th frig. that is made of plastic that you
> intend to remove, loosen,or bend, I found out the hard way when doing
> some interior work on the frig, the plastic is cold and brittle.......
Our 24-year-old GE has had a new door gasket. No service calls. The
biggest thing wrong with it is that it's harvest gold.
michael walter
in my house in Germany. Some were offered as kits to assemble, for
about 20-30$. Wish they would work here in the U.S.A. but they don't
for various reasons. But I am sure there are some models available
here as well.
I used to measure EVERY electric appliance in my house to get an
estimate of my electricity usage and distribution.
The outcome was in many cases very surprising; eg. all the 'silent'
consumers like LED clocks, standby TVs and (head heated!) VCRs
contributed more than 30% to the entire electricity bill!
In ranking order of energy consumption, BTW I do not cook:
Refrigerator: avg. 38% (48kWh/month)
Water pump (heating system): avg. 8.7% (11kWh/month)
VCR (standby and usage): avg. 9.7% (10.3 kWh/month
TV (stand by and usage): avg. 7.3% (9.2 kWh/month)
...
Sum: 124kWh/month, $26 (1994)
In a country where 1 kWh went for 20c 7 years ago it made sense to
know your electric consumers by name and number!
The German (actually Dutch Philips) refrigerator/freezer combo needed
about 48kWh/month (1.5kWh per day), a dream value compared ot my US
model (GE), which swallows almost twice as much since day 1 when I got
it here in 1995.
One way to measure the consumption of any device is to check the Watt
rating of it (on the back) and then count the percentage of
runtime/day. My US refrigerator is humming along almost 20 out of 60
minutes, due to poor insulation, inefficient construction and being a
general piece of crap. It cost me as much to run as it cost to buy 6
years ago. If a new one would do any better? I doubt it and simply
live with it for now. I guess that technology really improves over one
generation, ie 15-20 years on these things, so it probably isn't worth
to hope for anything better soon.
The rating stickers on these devices are as everything else a mild to
obscene exaggeration of the truth: room environmental temperature,
exposure to sun light, cooling settings, ice build up, load and
opening frequency are the key contributors to a more realistic number,
that is not taken into consideration in these ads in a realistic
manner. Your mileage may vary significantly.
My 0.02 Euros
michael
michael
John Gilmer
"michael walter" <mwa...@nightmail.com> wrote in message
news:m0ok5tsg089g5e92d...@4ax.com...
> These plugin power meters are fairly popular in Europe. We had several
> in my house in Germany. Some were offered as kits to assemble, for
> about 20-30$. Wish they would work here in the U.S.A. but they don't
> for various reasons. But I am sure there are some models available
> here as well.
I guess I don't understand why a true power meter (which averages the
product of instaneous volts and amps) would not work in the US.
Gary Heston
> If it's 20 years old, you may be able to pay for it fairly quickly by
>buying a new, more efficient one. Here are some numbers:
> My new 26 cubic foot Whirlpool conquest uses about 680 kWh/year of
>electricity for a total cost of about $47.60 per year at 7 cents per kWh.
>Based on survey information I have seen, your 20 year old probably uses over
>2000 kWh/year for a total electricity cost of about $150 per year. With a
>broken seal, it may even be worse than that.
I swapped out my upright freezer a month ago with a newer one purchased
at an estate auction; comparing the most recent bill with the previous
month, I'm saving about $14/mo. That gives me a payback period of around
16 months, disregarding interest issues (no credit or savings involved in
any case).
That's about a 38% drop, with an extra cold month tossed in to reduce the
savings. Should be even better in the summer without that extra 256+ KWH
that the AC was dealing with.
> At my electricity rate, it may not make sense to replace it. You should
>plug in your rate and see.
><flac...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:93ciqt$ih4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>> Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness, when
>> should a refrigerator be replaced?
When repair costs plus operating costs are high enough to give you a
payback in a reasonable amount of time.
>> I need a $50 gasket in my 20-year old GE side-by-side ... the almond
>> color isn't terribly current, but I'd rather have a life-cycle or
>> efficiency justification for the changeout rather than "well, I guess
>> it's time to replace it."
If it's running efficiently, i.e. it doesn't feel like a trip to the
equator when you walk in front of it, then replace the gasket. Otherwise,
start looking for a newer one at an estate sale or used appliance store.
Gary
--
Gary Heston ghe...@hiwaay.net
This item has been intercepted by the Echelon Project. So have all
of yours....
Jackie Kuscher
At last I can comment on something of some help. Dan is right. I
actually used one of those. I went to my electric company and told
them I was horrified at my electric bill and they gave me this awful
green box which I plugged into the wall and then plugged whatever
applicance I wanted into it and it showed me what I was using. They
told me how to read it of course. This was a few years ago now and
I'm sure they must still have the same thing. When you live in NH you
just get horrified at the electric bills.
Jackie
(to e-mail take the "x" off jackie)
us...@example.com
>Since I'm probably selling in a couple of years, and I understand
>kitchen project dollars come out of a sale at almost a 1/1 ratio (if
>not a little better), it probably makes good sense to do the
>replacement regardless
I don't think houses are usually sold with refrigerators. Are they?
Around here they don't seem to.
Nick Pine
>"John Gilmer" <gil...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>>I guess I don't understand why a true power meter (which averages the
>>product of instaneous volts and amps) would not work in the US.
>The U.S uses 60Hz power frequency. I believe Europe uses 50Hz...
And 240 vs 120V, which might be a power supply problem.
Nick
Norm
> Our 24-year-old GE has had a new door gasket. No service calls. The
> biggest thing wrong with it is that it's harvest gold.
Not saying this was the case with your fridge but an appliance repair
guy showed me a trick to revitalize old gaskets by heating them with a
hair dryer. Norm (about to spring for a new one since 2 repair guys
haven't been able to stop this'un from running all the time)
PS: don't I know you from somewhere Dan? :-)
--
Remove socks before Replying.
Ken
on a house in the US, for a $0.25. I gave this to my father who use to
be an electrician. He made a box for it and put all kinds of charts and
graphs on it. He also put plugs on it so you can plug anything into
it. I now have and what I can do with it is check how much power
anything takes. You use the charts on it and count how many times the
dial goes around in a period of time.
Someday I want to put an hours of use meter on it to.
Ken
over at the house next door and they were getting rid of an old fridge.
The kind with one big door and a handle you pull. Well I asked the guy
if he was getting rid of it. He said he was so I grabbed it and put it
in my garage. When the time came I move it upstairs. It worked GREAT.
Quite and did not run too much. Now I had to defrost it like once a
month or so BUT it worked. I have since told my former roommate that I
want it when he moves. It too needs a new gasket BUT it works.
Your right it hard to find one that is not frost-free. When you do they
use like 1/4 to 1/3 less power.
Derek R. Larson
We just bought in Minnesota in December. We looked at ~125 homes over a
four month period, and 99% of them included fridges and stoves. Perhaps
75% had washer and dryer as well. Another 60% or so included a
dishwasher. Perhaps a third had a water softener. Generally speaking,
all appliances are included in home sales in our market or the seller
takes a price hit.
-Derek
--
________________________________________________________________________
Derek R. Larson Indiana University Dept. of History
"Let me go on record as stating that Mountain Dew, although a refreshing
and enjoyable beverage, is NOT A CONTRACEPTIVE." -Ann Landers
Nick Pine
>...A little story on the 50 Hz. It seems that 60 Hz was the worst
>frequency to use as far as the human body is concerned. Seems it's
><tuned> so to speak such that the body reacts to the 60 HZ as a
><series trap> (resistance dips to a minimum)...
Makes no sense to me. My understanding is that this compromise came about
because lights don't appear to flicker as much at 50 or 60 Hz, and motors
and transformers are smaller than they would be at, say, 17 Hz, while
interference and radiation loss are lower than at, say, 1 kHz. OTOH, 120 V
is safer than 240, electrocution-wise, with more line loss.
If semiconductors keep getting cheaper, we may see HVDC distribution with
pole inverters and tiny transformers instead of big 10 cents/watt 60 Hz
transformers.
Nick
Nick Pine
>>>...the body reacts to the 60 HZ as a <series trap>
>>>(resistance dips to a minimum)...
Where's the inductance, Ken?
>>Makes no sense to me. ........OTOH, 120 V is safer than 240,
>>electrocution-wise, with more line loss.
>...based on experiments conducted on dogs in the '70s, the threshold
>current required to induce V.F. dropped steadily from DC to nearly 60 Hz.
>From that point, the current threshold rose rapidly into the high
>frequency range...
Got any references?
>...Few people die from V.B. at 480 volts and higher. Those recorded
>cases confirmed that the current flow through the victims bottom was
>in the range required to create V.B.
Is V.B. the same as V.F., or some fatal social disease? :-)
Nick
Ray L.
Nick Pine <ni...@acadia.ee.vill.edu> wrote in message
news:93fckm$2...@acadia.ee.vill.edu...
> interference and radiation loss are lower than at, say, 1 kHz. OTOH, 120 V
Eddy current losses were lower at 60 Hz, with the transformer alloys
of the day.
Using higher frequencies would allow the use of smaller, lighter
transformers and motors almsot everywhere. Of course, all of the
current ones would have to be replaced.
Dan Hicks
The only problem would be if it has a laminated iron core in the meter
movement that isn't designed for 60Hz. In theory this could cause the
meter to overheat, but in practice you'd probably just get slightly bad
readings.
Dan Hicks
Wouldn't be a problem for most wattmeters, though the other way (120V ->
240V) might.
Nick Pine
>>Where's the inductance, Ken?
>The body is more complex than any attempts to reduce it to a simple
>electronic circuit...
So you favor the woowoowoo model :-)
Nick
Ray L.
Ken H. <ken97...@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:741n5tcu7tffg1uid...@4ax.com...
> On 9 Jan 2001 15:55:37 -0500, ni...@ufo.ee.vill.edu (Nick Pine) wrote:
>
> >Ken H. <ken97...@eudoramail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>...the body reacts to the 60 HZ as a <series trap>
> >>>>(resistance dips to a minimum)...
> >
> >Where's the inductance, Ken?
>
> human body is between 4 and 15 degrees. It's apparent they are
> referring to a leading angle so, as you noted, I cannot explain the
> phenomena of the null point occurring without an inductive factor. Of
> course, it's also possible that the article I have is outdated now
> after close to 30 years.
It might be a function of the heart responding to different frequencies
in different ways, rather than a bulk electrical characteristic of the body.
Walt
It is coppertone, harvest gold, and avocado which aren't current. :)
Dennis
>
> Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness, when
> should a refrigerator be replaced?
>
#2 Your refrigerator smells of spoiled meat.
#1 Your wife uses it to warm food.
Dennis,
<Snip>
>
> --
> Mark Hankins
Kurt Doherty
Hash: SHA1
"Dennis" <denn...@clarityconnect.com> wrote in message
news:3A5C71...@clarityconnect.com...
> flac...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness,
> > when should a refrigerator be replaced?
> >
> #3 Your beer isn't cold any more.
> #2 Your refrigerator smells of spoiled meat.
> #1 Your wife uses it to warm food.
>
> Dennis,
AMEN for #3 or should that not be rule #1? :)
Kurt
> > --
> > Mark Hankins
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOlyMmUl2drVNE5hkEQIGewCeK63Txjxni8LSPtQVPp8WwahEfR8AoKTZ
64yKMLfIL8rxKI1PraS3K0fN
=BtUf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Tock
--Tock
Walt wrote in message <3A5C5731...@Early.com>...
flac...@my-deja.com
Wa...@Early.com wrote:
> >
> > the almond
> > color isn't terribly current,
>
>
> It is coppertone, harvest gold, and avocado which aren't current. :)
"Almond" has been ever so slightly lightened and renamed "Bisque". The
change is subtle, and just enough so that you don't want to mix the two
in the same kitchen.
I can still get almond, but I'm thinking of replacing it and the
dishwasher with *BLACK* ... if you buy an affordable stainless
appliance (as opposed to a carriage-trade make), you don't get the
fingerprint-resistant finish, and they dent easily too.
I have an over & under double oven range that's almond and in super-
good shape, and I don't want to yank it and have to think about how to
rewire and hang a microwave/range hood combo.
Dan Hicks
~^Johnny^~
did apparently write:
Ah, yes ... the old "round tops". They were more efficient, because
the walls were thicker, and had better insulation. Plus, there was a
positive pressure on the door gasket, due to the mechanical latch --
none of that "magnetic" crap you see today.
Technological advances are, all too often, two steps forward, and
three steps back, at the same time.
feh
--
-John
Lou Pogoda
~^Johnny^~ wrote in message <3vue6tkucfsjr6c8c...@4ax.com>...
>
>Ah, yes ... the old "round tops". They were more efficient, because
>the walls were thicker, and had better insulation. Plus, there was a
>positive pressure on the door gasket, due to the mechanical latch --
>none of that "magnetic" crap you see today.
>
>Technological advances are, all too often, two steps forward, and
>three steps back, at the same time.
>
were hailed for when they first came out - you could open them from the
inside - no more people (especially kids) locked in an old fridge, unable to
get out, and suffocating to death.
richard p dawson
we were throwing away
~^Johnny^~
<lpo...@home.nospam.com> did apparently write:
This is RARE, Lou.
These doors don't have pull handles on the inside, for one thing.
Also, more kids and babies swelter in locked cars, than do suffocate
in latched refrigerators.
It's kind'a like the guy who is afraid to fly. Well, you know the
odds of dying in a plane crash, vs. the odds of dying in an auto
wreck, and I DO mean mile -per -mile / person travelled.
Forget the old round-top fridges. We had better ban large plastic
bags. Too many die when suffocated by BAGS!
--
-John
suzn
"richard p dawson" <rda...@shout.net> wrote in message
news:3A679C60...@shout.net...
> but that is why we were all told to remove the door on any fridge
> we were throwing away
And there are some people who just dont follow instructions .......
Ken
jim
>
> Short of a total breakdown or nagging problem or severe ugliness, when
> should a refrigerator be replaced?
>
> color isn't terribly current, but I'd rather have a life-cycle or
> efficiency justification for the changeout rather than "well, I guess
> it's time to replace it."It time to replace it when the wife says so, remember it is her kitchen.
I dont care how well you fix it and how great it runs, when she want
another one, you have to go out and get one.....
Lou Pogoda
richard p dawson wrote in message <3A679C60...@shout.net>...
>but that is why we were all told to remove the door on any fridge
>we were throwing away
>
Lou Pogoda
~^Johnny^~ wrote in message <2s7f6tcho1mqjocjb...@4ax.com>...
>This is RARE, Lou.
>
>These doors don't have pull handles on the inside, for one thing.
>
>Also, more kids and babies swelter in locked cars, than do suffocate
>in latched refrigerators.
>
>It's kind'a like the guy who is afraid to fly. Well, you know the
>odds of dying in a plane crash, vs. the odds of dying in an auto
>wreck, and I DO mean mile -per -mile / person travelled.
>
>Forget the old round-top fridges. We had better ban large plastic
>bags. Too many die when suffocated by BAGS!
>
frequent threats out there? I'm just reporting what I heard when I was much
younger and magnetic doors were brand new.
I'm curious about the airplane fatality statistics. The per person per mile
argument is an old one, and I have no reason to disbelieve it. But it
doesn't feel quite right. With a car, I've read that most accidents happen
within 20 miles of home. So it would seem that miles is perhaps the wrong
(or misleading) indicator, at least with cars.
I wonder what the fatality statistics would be for both personal autos and
air travel if instead of being counted by miles, accidents were tablulated
by hours. 500 people in one aircraft travelling a 1,000 miles in two hours.
If the plane crashes and all aboard die, we have one death per thousand
miles, but we also have two hundred and fifty deaths per hour.
richard p dawson
being a hvac-r technician, i always repair my stuff
so i can honestly tell you that i have never thrown
a refrigerator away
but to answer your question , no.
i dont beleive it was always done.
rich
Lou Pogoda
richard p dawson wrote in message <3A6988CE...@shout.net>...
>me thinks lou might be getting a bit defensive,
>being a hvac-r technician, i always repair my stuff
>so i can honestly tell you that i have never thrown
>a refrigerator away
>but to answer your question , no.
>i dont beleive it was always done.
>rich
>
and heard, I don't see any reason to be.
~^Johnny^~
Pollak) did apparently write:
>x-no-archive: yes
>jim <db...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>
>>It time to replace it when the wife says so, remember it is her kitchen.
>>I dont care how well you fix it and how great it runs, when she want
>>another one, you have to go out and get one.....
>
>The two most important words in a marriage:
>
> Yes, dear.
LOL! You been listening to those Tex Williams records, again?
He had a song, about 30 years ago, entitled: "Who, Me?"
Check out Napster. It's a goodie! Classic Country.
--
-john
~~~~~~~~
"Think of all the time you waste complaining
Think of all the good that could be done"
-G. Davies
~~~~~~~~
Don K.
> This has always troubled me, the statistics are skewed to
> make flying look safe by choosing a per mile basis
>
> Consider the statistics on a per hour basis.
The most dangerous time in a plane is during takeoff and landing.
The number of miles in-between is largely irrelevant.
I think statistics should be calculated on a per flight basis.
I would like to know the odds of coming out alive if I enter a plane
compared to the odds of coming out alive if I enter a car.
Don
Joe Hammond
> can be computed from the ratio air to car accidents on a per mile basis
(x/y)
>
> X / Y = (x/y) (600/60) = (x/y)*10
>
> Now, this is why I say the measurement are skewed to indicate air
> travel is safe. Notice that on a per hour basis the ratio of accidents is
10
> times greater than the ratio on a per mile basis
So your arguement is that by car you are 1/10 as likely to be in an accident
per hour traveled but it's going to take 10 times as long to get to your
destination? What's the point of this analogy?
Michael Edelman
It's more realistic assessment of the risk to the passenger. When a car
crashes it rarely kills 300 people, for instance. And there's no such
thing as a low-speed fender bender in the air.
Passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because commercial
aircraft travel so fast. The best measure of risk is per trip, since you
make your risk assessment decision before you get on the plane or in the
car. What is the relative risk, then, when you get in a car or aircraft,
of not surviving the trip?
Not surprisingly, cars are far more likely to deliver their occupants
alive.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Edelman m...@spamcop.net
http://www.foldingkayaks.org (nomadics)
http://www.findascope.com (choosing a telescope)
Tom Ruta
wrote:
...
>Passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because commercial
>aircraft travel so fast. The best measure of risk is per trip, since you
>make your risk assessment decision before you get on the plane or in the
>car. What is the relative risk, then, when you get in a car or aircraft,
>of not surviving the trip?
>
>Not surprisingly, cars are far more likely to deliver their occupants
>alive.
http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/comparat.html
Tom
==============================================================
Need info on COTTAGES and CABINS?
http://www.cottageliving.com
==============================================================
Joe Hammond
"Michael Edelman" <m...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:3ABB9914...@spamcop.net...
> Joe Hammond wrote:
> >
> > > Now the ratio of air to car accidents on on per hour basis (X/Y)
> > > can be computed from the ratio air to car accidents on a per mile
basis
> > (x/y)
> > >
> > > X / Y = (x/y) (600/60) = (x/y)*10
> > >
> > > Now, this is why I say the measurement are skewed to indicate air
> > > travel is safe. Notice that on a per hour basis the ratio of accidents
is
> > 10
> > > times greater than the ratio on a per mile basis
> >
> > So your arguement is that by car you are 1/10 as likely to be in an
accident
> > per hour traveled but it's going to take 10 times as long to get to your
> > destination? What's the point of this analogy?
>
> It's more realistic assessment of the risk to the passenger. When a car
> crashes it rarely kills 300 people, for instance. And there's no such
> thing as a low-speed fender bender in the air.
>
> Passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because commercial
> aircraft travel so fast. The best measure of risk is per trip, since you
> make your risk assessment decision before you get on the plane or in the
> car. What is the relative risk, then, when you get in a car or aircraft,
> of not surviving the trip?
The risk of traveling 500 miles by car is greater than 500 by plane
(commercial airlines). Do you not agree with that? You have to equate
comparable trips. You can't compare the risk of traveling by car for 2 hours
to traveling by flight for 2. These are completely different trips.
Why do you contend passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because
"commercial aircraft fly so fast"?
Bob Ward
wrote:
>Joe Hammond wrote:
>>
>> > Now the ratio of air to car accidents on on per hour basis (X/Y)
>> > can be computed from the ratio air to car accidents on a per mile basis
>> (x/y)
>> >
>> > X / Y = (x/y) (600/60) = (x/y)*10
>> >
>> > Now, this is why I say the measurement are skewed to indicate air
>> > travel is safe. Notice that on a per hour basis the ratio of accidents is
>> 10
>> > times greater than the ratio on a per mile basis
>>
>> So your arguement is that by car you are 1/10 as likely to be in an accident
>> per hour traveled but it's going to take 10 times as long to get to your
>> destination? What's the point of this analogy?
>
>It's more realistic assessment of the risk to the passenger. When a car
>crashes it rarely kills 300 people, for instance. And there's no such
>thing as a low-speed fender bender in the air.
>
On the other hand, very few safe arrivals by car disgorge 300 healthy,
happy passengers.
>Passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because commercial
>aircraft travel so fast. The best measure of risk is per trip, since you
>make your risk assessment decision before you get on the plane or in the
>car. What is the relative risk, then, when you get in a car or aircraft,
>of not surviving the trip?
>
>Not surprisingly, cars are far more likely to deliver their occupants
>alive.
Not necessarily, if you are counting PASSENGER miles...
David Combs
Bob Ward <bob...@email.com> wrote:
><SNIP>
>
>>Passenger miles as a measure of risk is skewed because commercial
>>aircraft travel so fast. The best measure of risk is per trip, since you
>>make your risk assessment decision before you get on the plane or in the
>>car. What is the relative risk, then, when you get in a car or aircraft,
>>of not surviving the trip?
>>
>>Not surprisingly, cars are far more likely to deliver their occupants
>>alive.
>
>Not necessarily, if you are counting PASSENGER miles...
>
Who cares who's "right". Aren't we now talking about
SPIN, the USE of statistics to prove a point, a point
than make a heck of a lot of MONEY for someone.
We're talking P.R.
---
Another angle to look from:
Suppose there were NO airplanes.
Then, when we took a trip, we'd drive, but (on average)
not as far as we would had we had airplanes.
(I'm talking not just vacations, but business-trips too.)
Given *that* logic (not as many miles), then deaths
PER MILE is NOT a legit measure.
---
Another idea/fact/whatever: when doing a per-mile
calculation, you are NOT talking only about long,
1000-mile trips on the interstate, no cross-traffic,
no stop-lights, all going the same direction, ie
pretty safe.
No, we are ALSO being counted for driving to
the grocery-store, short distances, lots of turns,
lots of driveways with cars shooting out,
lots of intersections with cars running stop-signs,
etc.
So, not that we're ever going to prove commercial airlines
to be more dangerous (in some sense) than automobiles,
we do have to beware of the FACTOR of how MUCH safer
that they use in their ads and other lies.
David
Joe Hammond
> The number of miles in-between is largely irrelevant.
> I think statistics should be calculated on a per flight basis.
>
> I would like to know the odds of coming out alive if I enter a plane
> compared to the odds of coming out alive if I enter a car.
I don't agree that flight miles are irrelevant by I would agree the most
dangerous time is take-off and landing. Determining the "odds of coming out
alive" on a per trip basis would be very heavily dependent on length of trip
for car travel. This gets back to per mile travelled statistics.